Hi
It's great being on a mailing list with people who share the same interests!
First off, Chris, I hope it didn't sound like I was implying that you didn't
have proper training. Proper ethnographic training is not confined to
anthropology departments, and not all anthropology departments would provide
proper training. When I said 'proper' training, I meant just that; proper.
Oliver,
Regards the distinction between virtual ethnography and cyber anthropology
(as I see it, and hopefully many others will input here!),
cyber anthropology
-
Concerned with the human and the technological
-
Does not assume a shape or location of the field site
-
May use ethnographic methods including virtual ethnography
virtual ethnography
-
A method
-
Performed purely in the virtual arena, which therefore, assumes the
existence of a virtual arena and limits the shape and location of a specific
'culture'
-
May be just one method in a research (lets hope so)
I use this distinction because most 'virtual' research is concerned with
the interaction or mediation of communications between individuals and
computers or individuals and individuals. No research is purely virtual. It
can't be, by virtue of the fact that the researcher is there. Just like no
field site, however long ago, was truly separate from the world.
As such, cyber anthropology, in my mind at least, is concerned with
researching that part of humanity that interface with technology. More
generally cyber anthropology can refer to researching mobile phone use,
epidemiological factors relating to computer use, the shape of family
structure around the computer, etc. It is acutely aware of the 'real'. In
fact, I would suggest that any good cyber anthropological or cyber
sociological research would not bring pre-conceptions like virtual and real
into the research in the first place. To do so is to assume the shape and
location of the research site.
Now lets hear what other people think on the subject!
Pearse
